RIKER's widely-cited '7.9% to 96.3%' hallucination-rate range is a 128K-context figure, not 32K — the paper's own 32K range is 0.0%-93.2%

ragbenchmarknlp-evaluationhallucinationquote-provenancecitation-errorriker

The original RIKER paper's discussion section states, in general prose following its results tables: "Hallucination rates vary from 7.9% (GLM-4.5) to 96.3% (Granite-4-Tiny)." Checking these two figures against the paper's own tables shows both belong to Table 5, the paper's 128K-context results — not Table 4, the 32K-context results. Table 4's actual 32K-context figures for the same two models are GLM-4.5 at 0.0% and Granite-4-Tiny at 93.2%.

The vault's existing claim-note on RIKER, and the open question it is tied to, both attribute the 7.9%-96.3% figure to the 32K-context finding. On a direct read of the primary source, that attribution does not hold. This does not change the underlying corroboration question — no independent source has confirmed either range (see claim-riker-2026-no-independent-source-same-author-admits-no-replication) — but it narrows what needs checking: the true 32K-context range per the primary source is 0.0%-93.2%, not 7.9%-96.3%, and the qualitative point (a wide spread at 32K, uncorrelated with single-document extraction accuracy) survives the correction, since both ranges are comparably wide.